International Symposium on Agroecology at the FAO in Rome
by La Vía Campesina
FOOD SOVEREIGNTY AND TRADE
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON AGROECOLOGY AT THE FAO IN ROME [1]
Published on Thursday, 25 September 2014 14:20
"TODAY A WINDOW WAS OPENED IN WHAT FOR 50 YEARS HAS BEEN THE CATHEDRAL
OF THE GREEN REVOLUTION"
[2]PRESS RELEASE- LA VIA CAMPESINA
The _International Symposium on Agroecology for Food and Nutritional
Security_ was held on the 18th and 19th of September of 2014, at the
headquarters of the Food & Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) in
Rome. This marked the first time that the FAO has ever officially and
directly addressed the topic of agroecology.
In his closing remarks at the Symposium, José Graziano da Silva,
Director General of the FAO, said that: "Today a Window was opened in
what for 50 years has been the Cathedral of the Green Revolution." The
delegation of La Via Campesina, that participated in the Symposium,
welcomes this opening, but recommends caution, given the attempts to
coopt agroecology that were observed at the event.
According to La Via Campesina, the science, practices and movement of
agroecology are the product of centuries of accumulated peasant and
indigenous knowledge, knowledge of how food was produced for humanity
since long before farm chemicals were invented. This knowledge has been
organized through a 'dialog of knowledges' (dialogo de saberes) with the
western sciences of ecology, agronomy, rural sociology, etc. Support for
agroecology, among rural social movements, consumers, environmentalists
and others, has grown a lot in recent decades, in part because of it's
sharp critique of, and it's alternatives to, the badly-named 'Green
Revolution' of industrial agriculture. For La Via, peasant agroecology
is a fundamental building block in the construction of food sovereignty.
Governments and institutions, the majority of which respond to the
interests of national and transnational agribusiness, have resisted
agroecology. In fact, to speak of the alternatives embodied in
agroecology, has until now been taboo in institutions like the FAO.
Still, this situation has been changing of late, though only partially.
The rapid degradation of soils and other productive resources brought
about industrial farming practices, and climate change, have now created
growing uncertainty about the future of industrial agriculture. And the
number of scientists with studies and data that show agroecology to be a
superior approach, in terms of both productivity and sustainability, is
growing. The result has been more institutional opening to agroecology.
But the opening is relative. While social movements like La Via
Campesina see agroecology as the alternative to industrial agriculture,
and highlight it's potential help in transforming grim rural realities,
the new institutional opening is geared more toward a scaled-back
version of agroecology. This version is limited to seeing agroecology as
nothing more than the source of a few new tools for the toolbox of
industrial agriculture; in other words, of methods to reduce the
negative impacts of industrial farming practices on future productivity.
Those who promote this shrunken approach use names like 'sustainable' or
'ecological intensification,' or 'climate smart agriculture,' to refer
the erroneous idea that agroecology is compatible with large extensions
of industrial monoculture, pesticides and GMOs. For La Via Campesina,
this is not agroecology, but rather is a blatant attempt at cooptation,
which should be denounced and resisted.
A decent sized delegation from La Via attended the Symposium at FAO,
with delegates from Mozambique, India, Haiti, Cuba, Brazil, Mexico,
Nicaragua and Italy. Three of the delegates were speakers. The
delegation arrived expecting the worst, ready for a pitched battle
against the cooptation of agroecology. The reality was actually somewhat
more refreshing, as the majority of the scientists who were invited as
expert speakers, presented visions of agroecology that were quite
similar to the vision of La Via. They pointed to agroecology as an
alternative, for transformation, and highlighted it's social, political,
economic and cultural contents, in addition to the technical content.
This left the tendency toward cooptation as a minority position, though
it was present, and evident.
As a result, the summary of conclusions from the Symposium, presented by
the reporting team on the second day, emphasized positive points,
including the affirmations that:
* agroecology is based on a set of principles, and is not a tool box
nor a set of recipes,
* agroecology implicitly questions the contemporary agrifood model,
and promotes a radical transformation, which would place peasants and
family farmers at the center of the social process,
* agroecology is based on a dialog of knowledges, and thus must
continually link science with peasant knowledge, innovation and
practices.
And furthermore, that the principal challenges to be faced, must address
complex but urgent issues, such as:
* public policies that support and promote agroecological
transformation at local, national and regional scales,
* the alliance of farmers with conscious and responsible consumers,
based on the need for a radical transformation toward a socially just
food system,
* support for the efforts by rural social movements to bring
agroecology to a territorial scale.
Chavannes Jean-Baptiste, a Haitian peasant leader, and member of the
International Coordination Committee (ICC) of La Via Campesina, said
that "this Symposium represents a step in the right direction for FAO,"
but he issued a warning about the developing conflict "between good and
evil," over the definition and future of agroecology. Given this
dispute, he spoke of the need to specify 'agroecological peasant
agriculture,' because "agroecology is a way of life for us, not just a
mode of production."
Rilma Román, a leader of the National Association of Small Farmers of
Cuba (ANAP), who is also a member of the ICC of La Via, highlighted the
centrality of "peasant knowledge and practice as the true basis of
agroecology." She insisted that in countries like Cuba, "peasant
agroecology is not theoretical, rather it is already a reality." Andrea
Ferrante, leader of the Italian Association of Biological Farmers
(AIAB), emphasized that, "agroecology is also a reality in Europe,"
though he complained that "the fact of agroecology in the North was
pretty much ignored in this Symposium."
Marciano da Silva, of the Small Farmers' Movement of Brazil (MPA),
called for vigilance, as we will face ever more attempts by agribusiness
and institutions to coopt agroecology. He remarked that while the FAO,
and the ministers of agriculture from several countries who spoke at the
Symposium, made public commitments to agroecology, "it is up to us to
hold them to those commitments."
Renaldo Chingore João, from the National Peasants' Union of Mozambique
(UNAC), underlined the importance of the tacit recognition by FAO that
"the Green Revolution is in rapid decline," and said that "it is
important to transmit this message to our African governments."
Nandini Kardahalli Singarigowda, a successful agroecological producer
from the Karnataka State Farmers Association of India (KRRS), said that
"we peasant women of KRRS in India are already successfully promoting
agroecology," and asked, therefore: "why can't the FAO do the same?"
Finally, Chavannes Jean Baptiste of the Via Campesina Haití, explained
that "agroecology is above all a social and organizational process." "It
requires," he said, "peasant organizations and rural social movements
who are capable of building social processes based on horizontal
learning and peasant protagonism."
FOOD SOVEREIGNTY AND TRADE
INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON AGROECOLOGY AT THE FAO IN ROME [1]
Published on Thursday, 25 September 2014 14:20
"TODAY A WINDOW WAS OPENED IN WHAT FOR 50 YEARS HAS BEEN THE CATHEDRAL
OF THE GREEN REVOLUTION"
[2]PRESS RELEASE- LA VIA CAMPESINA
The _International Symposium on Agroecology for Food and Nutritional
Security_ was held on the 18th and 19th of September of 2014, at the
headquarters of the Food & Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) in
Rome. This marked the first time that the FAO has ever officially and
directly addressed the topic of agroecology.
In his closing remarks at the Symposium, José Graziano da Silva,
Director General of the FAO, said that: "Today a Window was opened in
what for 50 years has been the Cathedral of the Green Revolution." The
delegation of La Via Campesina, that participated in the Symposium,
welcomes this opening, but recommends caution, given the attempts to
coopt agroecology that were observed at the event.
According to La Via Campesina, the science, practices and movement of
agroecology are the product of centuries of accumulated peasant and
indigenous knowledge, knowledge of how food was produced for humanity
since long before farm chemicals were invented. This knowledge has been
organized through a 'dialog of knowledges' (dialogo de saberes) with the
western sciences of ecology, agronomy, rural sociology, etc. Support for
agroecology, among rural social movements, consumers, environmentalists
and others, has grown a lot in recent decades, in part because of it's
sharp critique of, and it's alternatives to, the badly-named 'Green
Revolution' of industrial agriculture. For La Via, peasant agroecology
is a fundamental building block in the construction of food sovereignty.
Governments and institutions, the majority of which respond to the
interests of national and transnational agribusiness, have resisted
agroecology. In fact, to speak of the alternatives embodied in
agroecology, has until now been taboo in institutions like the FAO.
Still, this situation has been changing of late, though only partially.
The rapid degradation of soils and other productive resources brought
about industrial farming practices, and climate change, have now created
growing uncertainty about the future of industrial agriculture. And the
number of scientists with studies and data that show agroecology to be a
superior approach, in terms of both productivity and sustainability, is
growing. The result has been more institutional opening to agroecology.
But the opening is relative. While social movements like La Via
Campesina see agroecology as the alternative to industrial agriculture,
and highlight it's potential help in transforming grim rural realities,
the new institutional opening is geared more toward a scaled-back
version of agroecology. This version is limited to seeing agroecology as
nothing more than the source of a few new tools for the toolbox of
industrial agriculture; in other words, of methods to reduce the
negative impacts of industrial farming practices on future productivity.
Those who promote this shrunken approach use names like 'sustainable' or
'ecological intensification,' or 'climate smart agriculture,' to refer
the erroneous idea that agroecology is compatible with large extensions
of industrial monoculture, pesticides and GMOs. For La Via Campesina,
this is not agroecology, but rather is a blatant attempt at cooptation,
which should be denounced and resisted.
A decent sized delegation from La Via attended the Symposium at FAO,
with delegates from Mozambique, India, Haiti, Cuba, Brazil, Mexico,
Nicaragua and Italy. Three of the delegates were speakers. The
delegation arrived expecting the worst, ready for a pitched battle
against the cooptation of agroecology. The reality was actually somewhat
more refreshing, as the majority of the scientists who were invited as
expert speakers, presented visions of agroecology that were quite
similar to the vision of La Via. They pointed to agroecology as an
alternative, for transformation, and highlighted it's social, political,
economic and cultural contents, in addition to the technical content.
This left the tendency toward cooptation as a minority position, though
it was present, and evident.
As a result, the summary of conclusions from the Symposium, presented by
the reporting team on the second day, emphasized positive points,
including the affirmations that:
* agroecology is based on a set of principles, and is not a tool box
nor a set of recipes,
* agroecology implicitly questions the contemporary agrifood model,
and promotes a radical transformation, which would place peasants and
family farmers at the center of the social process,
* agroecology is based on a dialog of knowledges, and thus must
continually link science with peasant knowledge, innovation and
practices.
And furthermore, that the principal challenges to be faced, must address
complex but urgent issues, such as:
* public policies that support and promote agroecological
transformation at local, national and regional scales,
* the alliance of farmers with conscious and responsible consumers,
based on the need for a radical transformation toward a socially just
food system,
* support for the efforts by rural social movements to bring
agroecology to a territorial scale.
Chavannes Jean-Baptiste, a Haitian peasant leader, and member of the
International Coordination Committee (ICC) of La Via Campesina, said
that "this Symposium represents a step in the right direction for FAO,"
but he issued a warning about the developing conflict "between good and
evil," over the definition and future of agroecology. Given this
dispute, he spoke of the need to specify 'agroecological peasant
agriculture,' because "agroecology is a way of life for us, not just a
mode of production."
Rilma Román, a leader of the National Association of Small Farmers of
Cuba (ANAP), who is also a member of the ICC of La Via, highlighted the
centrality of "peasant knowledge and practice as the true basis of
agroecology." She insisted that in countries like Cuba, "peasant
agroecology is not theoretical, rather it is already a reality." Andrea
Ferrante, leader of the Italian Association of Biological Farmers
(AIAB), emphasized that, "agroecology is also a reality in Europe,"
though he complained that "the fact of agroecology in the North was
pretty much ignored in this Symposium."
Marciano da Silva, of the Small Farmers' Movement of Brazil (MPA),
called for vigilance, as we will face ever more attempts by agribusiness
and institutions to coopt agroecology. He remarked that while the FAO,
and the ministers of agriculture from several countries who spoke at the
Symposium, made public commitments to agroecology, "it is up to us to
hold them to those commitments."
Renaldo Chingore João, from the National Peasants' Union of Mozambique
(UNAC), underlined the importance of the tacit recognition by FAO that
"the Green Revolution is in rapid decline," and said that "it is
important to transmit this message to our African governments."
Nandini Kardahalli Singarigowda, a successful agroecological producer
from the Karnataka State Farmers Association of India (KRRS), said that
"we peasant women of KRRS in India are already successfully promoting
agroecology," and asked, therefore: "why can't the FAO do the same?"
Finally, Chavannes Jean Baptiste of the Via Campesina Haití, explained
that "agroecology is above all a social and organizational process." "It
requires," he said, "peasant organizations and rural social movements
who are capable of building social processes based on horizontal
learning and peasant protagonism."
Links:
------
[1]
http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/main-issues-mainmenu-27/food-soverei...
[2] http://viacampesina.org/en/images/chavennes%20roma%202014.jpg
10 years, 3 months
UN-masking Climate Smart Agriculture
by La Vía Campesina
UN-MASKING CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE [1]
Published on Tuesday, 23 September 2014 15:13
PRESS RELEASE
INTERNATIONAL PEASANT MOVEMENT/MOVIMIENTO CAMPESINO INTERNACIONAL
[2]History presents itself first as tragedy, and the second time as a
farce.
As women, men, peasants, smallholder family farmers, migrant, rural
workers, indigenous, and youth of La Via Campesina, we denounce climate
smart agriculture which is presented to us as a solution to climate
change and as a mechanism for sustainable development. For us, it is
clear that underneath its pretense of addressing the persistent poverty
in the countryside and climate change, there is nothing new. Rather,
this is a continuation of a project first begun with the Green
Revolution in the early 1940's and continued through the 70's and 80's
by the World Bank's Poverty Reduction projects and the corporate
interests involved. These projects, such as the so-called Green
Revolution, decimated numerous peasant economies, particularly in the
South, to the extent that many countries, like México for example, that
were self-sufficient in food production, became dependent on the North
to feed their population within a short couple of decades.
The result of these projects, dictated by industrial capital's need for
expansion, was the coopting of traditional agricultural producers and
production and their insertion into the present industrial agriculture
and food regime. A regime that is based on increased use of toxic
chemicals, dependent on fossil fuel inputs and technology, increasing
exploitation of agricultural and rural workers, with its resulting loss
of biodiversity; a food system that is now under the control of
corporations and large industrial farmers, the main beneficiaries of
these projects. The result has been the loss of food security and
sovereignty, transforming entire countries that were once net food
exporters into net food importers. This is not so much that they cannot
produce food, but because now, instead, they produce commodity crops
used to produce industrialized foods, fuels, manufactured products for
sale, and for speculation in the world financial markets.
Today, some of the same actors of these previous projects, such as the
World Bank, are the forces behind the imposition of climate smart
agriculture as a solution to climate change and to increase income of
the rural poor using the same failed thesis that to increase incomes one
must increase productivity. It is clear that the intention is to create
a market for the Green Revolution as a solution to climate change,
poverty and as a proposal for sustainable development in rural areas. We
identify this as part of a larger process of "green" structural
adjustment projects required by an economic system and the political
elites in distress, because they have exhausted other places for
enormous speculative financial investments and now see agriculture and
agricultural land as the new frontier.
Climate smart agriculture begins with deception by not making a
differentiation between the negative effects of industrialized
agriculture and the real solutions offered by traditional sustainable
peasant agriculture which has contributed to alleviating poverty, hunger
and remediation of climate change. To the contrary, climate smart
agriculture equates and equally blames all forms of agricultural
production for the negative effects that in fact only industrialized
agricultural and food production has caused, and fails to recognize and
accept the differences between "agri-cultures" and agricultural
production methods. The agricultural activity that has most contributed
to greenhouse gas emissions has been industrial agriculture, not
smallholder sustainable agriculture.
Climate smart agriculture will lead to further consolidation of land,
pushing peasant and family farmers towards World Bank Projects, the Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other institutions, creating
dependency on so-called new technologies through their complete packages
that include prescriptions of "climate smart varieties", inputs, and
credit, while ignoring traditional tried and true adaptive farming
techniques and stewardship of seed varieties in practice by farmers.
Reliance on World Bank promoted methods of production and genetically
modified seed varieties will only increase the vulnerability of peasants
and small-scale producers, as those packages will not allow them to
adapt to climate change, nor will they be able to improve their incomes,
and will only result in pushing them further into debt and increased
dependency. As the Green Revolution meant the imposition of synthetic
fertilizers and pesticides as requirement to access loans and technical
support, now it is the imposition of transgenic and biotechnology for
the same requirements, and all under the name of productivity.
The idea of increasing agricultural productivity in a sustainable way,
or what is now called "sustainable intensification", is false. Even more
so, when one considers that raising yield per hectare through production
intensification only increases the income for corporations, financial
market speculators, and large landholding farmers. So called
"sustainable intensification" is not really about increasing yield per
acre, it is more about green-washing large scale industrialized
production following the old adage "get big or get out". Increasingly,
peasant and smallholder family farmers have to produce crops for the
commodity market and not for local and regional food systems. They are
producing for corporations who are manufacturing unhealthy processed
food, fuel and supplies to make other products such as farmed -meat and
pharmaceuticals. Peasants and small-scale family farmers will have no
choice but to continue to accept the task of feeding the insatiable
capitalist food production machine and its speculative activities in the
financial markets.
This intensification of production is also an effort to reduce the cost
of labor, which means further degrading working conditions, and lower
salaries for migrant workers. Most peasants and small holders will be
cast aside because there's no room for them in industrial agriculture
except as landless peasants and one of millions of migrants that are
seeking to try their luck as low wage laborers in the cities and
countryside.
Ultimately, climate smart agriculture tries to cover-up and hide the
need for genuine agriculture and land reform. It also hides, and lies
about, the issue of scarcity of land and natural resources. Land and
natural resources are only scarce for peasant and small holding farmers.
Poverty exists as a result of lack of access to land, land tenure and
use, the unfair treatment and wages of workers and an unrelenting
exploitation of their labor in order to meet the needs of capitalism,
all of which is shaping the madness we are facing today.
In addition, climate smart agriculture, like the Reduction for Emission
on Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), will expand the carbon
market and its use for financial speculation. The possibility of big
profits with investments in carbon credits generated from farmlands
involved in climate smart agriculture projects will increase speculation
in the carbon market, leading to further "carbon land grabs" by
large-scale investors and producers, and the further displacement of
peasant and smallholder farmers, just as REDD displaces indigenous
people.
Under this climate smart agriculture framework, there is little hope of
reducing and removing greenhouse gases, trying to solve food insecurity
or any significant rural economic and social development. The problems
of poverty, food insecurity and climate change are not market failures,
but rather are structural flaws that will persist and worsen with its
implementation.
We need systemic change NOW!
Today, just as in the past, we are ready to fight against the false
solutions of the capitalist "green economy" and for real solutions to
climate change and poverty, through our demands for climate and
environmental justice.
We continue to propose and put into practice wherever we can
agroecological production and the construction of people's food
sovereignty. We consciously do this as another space to bring about the
structural changes that we really need to deal with the issues of
poverty, climate change and peoples' inability to feed themselves.
We call on all social movements gathered in New York to denounce climate
smart agriculture as a false solution, oppose the launching of the
Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture by UN Secretary General
Ban Ki-moon at the UN Climate Summit in New York City, and to join us in
the struggle for food sovereignty, and for a different model of
agriculture and food production that will provide a just economic well
being for small-scale farmers and their communities while producing
enough healthy food to meet people's nutritional needs and guaranteed
access to food for everyone. Any method of production and consumption,
to be truly sustainable, must enrich and protect Mother Earth. (Download
PDF [3])
NO TO CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE!
YES TO LAND REFORM AND AGROECOLOGY
FOR PEOPLE'S FOOD SOVEREIGNTY!
GLOBALIZE THE STRUGGLE GLOBALIZE HOPE!
For more information during the NYC Climate Summit, you can contact:
Dena Hoff, Antolin Huascar or Carlos Marentes Jr., at (413) 345-1137
(USA).
Links:
------
[1]
http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/actions-and-events-mainmenu-26/1670-...
[2] http://viacampesina.org/en/images/logo%202014.JPG
[3]
http://viacampesina.org/downloads/pdf/en/LVC%20UNmasking%20CSA%20_ENG-FIN...
10 years, 3 months
Nyeleni Newsletter: Community struggles for the defence of their territories - New edition online!
by La Vía Campesina
_EN COMMUNITY STRUGGLES FOR THE DEFENCE OF THEIR TERRITORIES_
[1]
The new edition of the Nyéléni Newsletter is now online!
LANDGRABBING CONTINUES UNABATED WORLDWIDE.
It is not only about the use of industrial agricultural means to engage
in the monoculture of primary resources for exportation,
or the delocalised production of foodstuffs for other countries.
It implies _extractivism_: control of water, mining, oil industries,
deforestation, drug trafficking, environmental services and
REDD projects (land areas held in disregards or so called marginal
lands), and the subsequent speculation on these,
followed by real estate, tourism, urban development, military
geopolitics and much more.
In this edition of the Nyéléni Newsletter we want to make an overview
of this process
and of the possibilities of resisting it from our communities.
_Click here to download the english edition_ [1]_ _or read it directly
in the website at www.nyeleni.org [2] !
For any further information, please contact info(a)nyeleni.org
PLEASE CIRCULATE IT TO YOUR CONTACTS!
Links:
------
[1] http://www.nyeleni.org/ccount/click.php?id=59
[2] http://www.nyeleni.org
10 years, 3 months
U.S. Farmworkers and Palestinian Farmers share 2014 Food Sovereignty Prize
by La Vía Campesina
U.S. FARMWORKERS AND PALESTINIAN FARMERS SHARE 2014 FOOD SOVEREIGNTY
PRIZE
_HONOREES REPRESENT COMMUNITIES DEFENDING THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS TO FOOD IN
THE FACE OF POLICIES OF LAND AND WATER GRABBING, MIGRATION, AND
MILITARIZATION_
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 9, 2014
Des Moines, IA -- The US Food Sovereignty Alliance (USFSA) is honored to
name the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC) of Palestine,
based in Gaza and the West Bank, and Community to Community Development
/Comunidad a Comunidad (C2C) of Bellingham, Washington, as co-recipients
of the 2014 Food Sovereignty Prize.
Their stories of continuous struggle to defend the rights of their
communities - farmers and fishers in the occupied Palestinian
territories and migrant Mexican farm workers in Washington State, both
seeking to produce their own food, on their own land, in their home
communities - stand in stark contrast to the storylines coming from
agribusiness: that technological changes to crops can meet human needs
and resolve hunger.
Palestine has been under Israeli occupation for decades and this summer
faced heightened pressure, including thousands killed and many more
injured from bombings, destruction of homes, schools, hospitals, farms,
and fishing boats, and hundreds of arrests without due process, and the
continued building of settlements on Palestinian farmland. UAWC builds
farmers cooperatives and seed banks, and supports women's leadership,
while continuing to seek its members' human rights to food, land, and
water.
"This important prize inspires UAWC to carry on its work in defending
Palestinian farmers' rights against the brutal Israeli violations, both
through supporting small-scale farmers and fishermen toward their food
sovereignty and rights to land and water, and also through coordination
with local and international movements for social justice and human
rights," said Khaled Hidan, General Director of the Union of
Agricultural Work Committees in Palestine.
In Washington State, amid failed immigration policies that criminalize
working families, Community to Community Development has supported and
worked with immigrant farm workers to develop farm worker-owned
cooperatives, organize a successful nutrition education project called
Cocinas Sanas, and promote domestic fair trade in regional assemblies
and meetings. Most recently, C2C has supported an emerging farm worker
union, Familias Unidas por la Justicia, and organized a national boycott
of Sakuma Farms, their employer, who withheld pay, provided poor
housing, and has since retaliated against the workers. Familias Unidas
por la Justicia recently won a settlement for wage theft and had a
Superior Court Judge rule uphold their right to organize - but their
fight is not over.
"In honoring Community to Community, the USFSA honors indigenous
farmworkers in the U.S. Displaced by NAFTA, these peasant farmers from
Mexico are practicing a tradition of struggle for justice. Together, C2C
and Familias Unidas are promoting food sovereignty in rural Washington
State and challenging the corporate agricultural interests that are
controlling our food system," said Rosalinda Guillen, Executive Director
of Community to Community Development.
The Food Sovereignty Prize will be awarded on the evening of October
15in Des Moines, IA, at the Historical Building. The Food Sovereignty
Prize challenges the view that simply producing more through industrial
agriculture and aquaculture will end hunger or reduce suffering. The
world currently produces more than enough food, but unbalanced access to
wealth means the inadequate access to food. Real solutions protect the
rights to land, seeds and water of family farmers and indigenous
communities worldwide and promote sustainable agriculture through
agroecology. The communities around the world who struggle to grow their
food and take care of their land have long known that destructive
political, economic, and social policies, as well as militarization,
deprive communities of their rights. These are the root causes of want,
hunger and poverty.
The USFSA represents a network of food producers and labor,
environmental, faith-based, social justice and anti-hunger advocacy
organizations. Additional supporters of the 2014 Food Sovereignty Prize
include Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, the Women's
International League for Peace and Freedom - Des Moines, and Occupy the
World Food Prize, along with media sponsor EcoWatch.
For event updates and background on food sovereignty and the prize
winners, visit www.foodsovereigntyprize.org. Also, visit the Food
Sovereignty Prize on Facebook (facebook.com/FoodSovereigntyPrize) and
join the conversation on Twitter (#foodsovprize)
CONTACT:
Adam Mason, State Policy Organizing Director
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement
(515) 282-0484, adam(a)iowacci.org
Lisa Griffith, National Family Farm Coalition
US Food Sovereignty Alliance
(773) 319-5838, lisa(a)nffc.net
10 years, 3 months
